State v. Hunt
211 N.C. App. 452
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Defendant was convicted of second-degree sexual offense and a crime against nature after a 2009 trial in Randolph County.
- The alleged victim, Clara, was 17 at the time and potentially mentally disabled with IQs reported around 61.
- State presented lay testimony from teachers and police but no expert testimony on Clara's level of mental disability.
- Defense moved for dismissal for insufficiency of the evidence, which the trial court denied.
- The appellate court reversed and vacated the convictions, holding the evidence insufficient to prove mental disability as required by statute.
- The court concluded the state must prove mental retardation and that it renders the victim substantially incapable of resisting or communicating unwillingness to submit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Clara's mental disability was sufficiently proven | Hunt argued there was insufficient mental disability evidence. | State contends Clara's IQ <70 with functional deficits shows disability. | Insufficient evidence; expert testimony required |
| Whether lack of expert testimony tainted both offenses | State relied on lay witnesses to prove disability. | No expert testimony available to establish extent of disability. | Reversed; expert testimony necessary to prove extent of disability |
| Whether insufficiency as to second-degree offense also invalidates the crime against nature charge | State argues both offenses stand on lack of consent due to disability. | If second-degree offense fails, crime against nature should fail too. | Both offenses vacated; insufficient evidence for either charge |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Washington, 131 N.C.App. 156, 506 S.E.2d 283 (1998) (expert testimony needed to prove extent of mental retardation in sexual offense case)
- State v. Whiteley, 172 N.C.App. 772, 616 S.E.2d 576 (2005) (post-Lawrence framework for applying §14-177; must prove non-consent for crime against nature)
- State v. Zuniga, 348 N.C. 214, 498 S.E.2d 611 (1998) (mental retardation evidence; expert testing and disability range considerations)
- State v. Ortez, 178 N.C.App. 236, 631 S.E.2d 188 (2006) (uses expert evaluation in assessing mental retardation context)
- State v. Stubbs, 266 N.C. 295, 145 S.E.2d 899 (1966) (general framework for nature of crime against nature and consent notions)